Michael Harris wrote:
When i try adding these rules:
ip route add default via X.X.X.1 dev eth0 table 200
ip route add nat X.X.X.6 via Z.Z.Z.46
ip rule add from Z.Z.Z.46 nat X.X.X.6 table 200
the second route causes this error: "RTNETLINK answers: File exists"
i have also tried changing the command
Hey everyone,
OK, not sure if this is more appropriate on the netfilter mailing list,
but here it goes.
This is a weird setup that is out of my company's control. We have a
webserver setup which will be contacted by several clients with
different ip. All of these client ip must be translated t
See, /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_conntrack_max
try to change value from this file to a higher value. It may happen. If it
doesn't help go keep mailing me :).
No i didn't overcome my problem yet. But I'm close. I did what i sad in the
first line of my mail and it help for some time.
I think htb has some
My Linux workstation (Mandrake 10.1 kernel 2.6.8.1) is dual-homed to two
ADSL Internet providers. Card eth0 (192.168.9.250) is the default route
and leads to an SMC router (192.168.9.254). Card eth1 (192.168.1.250)
leads to a Linksys router (192.168.1.1). I'm not doing any NAT or PPPoE
in the wo
My Linux workstation (Mandrake 10.1 kernel 2.6.8.1) is dual-homed to two
ADSL Internet providers. Card eth0 (192.168.9.250) is the default route
and leads to an SMC router (192.168.9.254). Card eth1 (192.168.1.250)
leads to a Linksys router (192.168.1.1). I'm not doing any NAT or PPPoE
in the wo
After upgrading our router from redhat 7.3 (linux 2.4.18 ) to mandrake 10.0
(linux 2.6.3) some of our routing scripts failed. This configuration worked
properly before we changed distributions.
X.X.X.2 is supposed to recieve traffic for X.X.X.6 and nat that to Z.Z.Z.46
ip addr list |grep
